I would like to take this opportunity to restate some observations and suggestions regarding the release process. a) This process is much, much improved compared to that of the previous one. 99% of the credit goes to Beman for getting this going and sticking with it. And the boost library is significantly larger than it was in the past so even this characterization doesn't to justice to the scale of the accomplishment. b) The current set of release failures on the release branch are annoying but manageable. But still, there is room for improvement at relatively little cost. I would propose that developers do the following. 1) make the svn tree on your local machine based on the "release" branch. 2) switch you're directories to the "trunk" 3) make your changes in your libraries and test on your machine. and check into the trunk. 4) When you're satisfied, update your local boost. This will make sure that you're local version reflects the next expected release. 5) Merge your set of changes into the release branch. This should Maximize the chances that you come up with a clean release summary. Ideally, the trunk tests would be done in a similar way. That is, against the last release except for the new check-ins. But until that happens, until that happens, a large part of the benefit can be achieved by an individual author by following the above plan. I've been using it and it makes things much easier. Robert Ramey Beman Dawes wrote:

Although most of the tests pass, default_toolset is failing on all platforms. There are a few other scattered failures.

See http://beta.boost.org/development/tests/release/developer/build.html Please fix or markup,

Thanks,

--Beman _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost